Available online from law.com: Marcia Coyle has an article headlined “High Court Justices to Review Detainees’ Rights Under Habeas Corpus; Court to weigh whether Military Commissions Act unconstitutionally bars access to the writ.”
An article headlined “N.Y. State Brief Defends Restrictions on Attorney Advertisements; Argues commercial speech can be limited” begins, “A Northern District of New York federal judge failed to recognize the limits the U.S. Supreme Court has placed on commercial free speech when he ruled that most of New York state’s new restrictions on attorney advertisements are unconstitutional, the state is arguing on appeal.”
And Shannon P. Duffy reports that “Finding Immunity Deal Breached, Federal Judge Dismisses Antitrust Indictment.”
“State’s system of electing justices called ‘troubling'”: This article appears today in The Wisconsin State Journal.
And today in The Capital Times of Madison, Wisconsin, John Nichols has an op-ed entitled “Why Ziegler must quit the court.”
“Supreme Court upholds law divvying up lawsuit liability”: The Arizona Daily Star provides a news update that begins, “A 20-year-old law doesn’t violate Arizona’s constitutional rights to sue even if it effectively leaves consumers unable to recover all their damages, the state Supreme Court ruled Monday. The justices rejected arguments that a company which distributes a faulty product is automatically liable for any and all damages it causes.”
You can access today’s ruling of the Supreme Court of Arizona at this link.
“Glendale ‘for sale’ sign saga ends”: The Cincinnati Enquirer provides a news update that begins, “The battle over ‘for sale’ signs in Glendale will not be heading to the U.S. Supreme Court. The court rejected a request Monday to review Glendale’s ban on ‘for sale’ signs on cars parked on public property, which the U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals found violated the First Amendment.”
“A Big Week for Old Grudge: With Detainees And Death Penalty Cases, Supreme Court Reconsiders Emotional Issues.” CBS News legal analyst Andrew Cohen has this CourtWatch essay online today.
“Rights for embryos proposed; Abortion foes push state initiatives to bestow ‘personhood'”: This article appears today in The Chicago Tribune, which also contains a related article headlined “Ethicists ponder embryo personhood.”
“Sleeping Giant: The Supreme Court needs to do a better job of protecting the Constitution; Here’s how we could force them to.” Eric Rauchway has this essay online today at The New Republic.
“Guantanamo Case Goes Beyond Detainee Rights”: This audio segment (RealPlayer required) featuring Nina Totenberg appeared on this evening’s broadcast of NPR’s “All Things Considered.”
“Supreme Court to Hear Guantanamo Case”: This audio segment (RealPlayer required) featuring Dahlia Lithwick appeared on today’s broadcast of NPR’s “Day to Day.”
And this past Saturday’s broadcast of C-SPAN’s “America & the Courts” featured a moot court of the case (RealPlayer required), with Chief Justice Joan Biskupic presiding and Tenth Circuit Judge Michael W. McConnell arguing the federal government’s side of the case.
“How hard can judges crack down on bias? The high court takes up a case where racial bias may have affected jury selection.” Warren Richey will have this article Tuesday in The Christian Science Monitor.
“Court: State can’t pay for religious prison treatment.” The Des Moines Register provides a news update that begins, “Spending taxpayer money on a faith-based treatment program in which Iowa prisoners immerse themselves in evangelical Christianity is unconstitutional, a federal appeals court ruled today. The 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in a 28-page decision, concluded that the program at the Newton Correctional Facility has advanced religious indoctrination at government expense.”
My earlier coverage of today’s Eighth Circuit ruling appears at this link.
In related news, two separation of church and state appeals will be heard tomorrow before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit due to the efforts of Michael A. Newdow, as I noted in this post from Saturday night.
“Appeal Heard in Border Agents’ Shooting”: The Associated Press provides this report.
And The Houston Chronicle provides a news update headlined “Judge: Prosecutors ‘overreacted’ in border shooting.”
“Writing Lessons: The Supreme Court plays Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon.” Doug Kendall has this jurisprudence essay online at Slate.
Access online the transcript of today’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in Sprint/United Management Co. v. Mendelsohn, No. 06-1221: The Court has posted the transcript at this link.
“The Court: How ‘So Few Have So Quickly Changed So Much.'” In the December 20, 2007 issue of The New York Review of Books, Anthony Lewis has this review of Jeffrey Toobin’s book, “The Nine: Inside the Secret World of the Supreme Court.”
“U.S. rights stance faces big test in Guantanamo case”: Reuters provides a report that begins, “The tarnished U.S. human rights image faces a major test this week as the Supreme Court considers whether terrorism suspects held for years without charges at Guantanamo Bay are wrongly detained.”
And if anyone doubts whether the case represents a “major test,” word from a “How Appealing” reader based at GTMO is that ABC News correspondent Jan Crawford Greenburg was there last week for some first-hand reporting.
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit announces its ruling in Americans United for Separation of Church and State v. Prison Fellowship Ministries, Inc.: You can access today’s ruling at this link.
That court’s own summary of the decision begins:
In action by inmates, taxpayers, inmate relatives and Americans United for Separation of Church and State alleging prison officials decision to pay the non-sectarian expenses of a values-based pre-release program violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, the inmates, the taxpayer and Americans United had standing to challenge the program, while contributors to the inmates’ telephone accounts did not; matter was not moot; defendants Prison Fellowship and InnerChange were state actors for Section 1983 purposes; because the indoctrination and definition criteria indicate InnerChange had the effect of advancing or endorsing religion, the state’s direct aid to InnerChange during the years 2000 to 2004 violated the Establishment clauses of the U.S. and Iowa Constitutions; the district court did not err in finding that the per diem structure used for the program from 2005 to 2007 also violated the Establishment clauses of the U.S. and Iowa Constitutions
Circuit Judge Duane Benton wrote the opinion on behalf of a unanimous three-judge panel, which included retired Justice Sandra Day O’Connor sitting by designation.
“Ending Bush’s War On Due Process”: In today’s issue of National Journal, Stuart Taylor Jr. has an essay that begins, “Lakhdar Boumediene was abducted almost six years ago from his home in Bosnia and flown to Guantanamo. He may be a bad guy. Or he may not be. We have no idea. The reason is President Bush’s continuing war on due process, which has blighted the lives of some unknown number of innocent men while doing vast damage to America’s standing in the world.”
The Associated Press is reporting: Pete Yost reports that “Court to Hear Case Over Marcos-Era Funds.”
And in other coverage from The AP of today’s Order List of the U.S. Supreme Court, “Justices Turn Down Online Piracy Case“; “Court Backs Ruling Against Congressman“; “Court to Stay Out of LA County Seal Case“; and “Court Rejects Mental Health Case.”
“Court to rule on right to lawyer”: Lyle Denniston has this post at “SCOTUSblog.” According to Lyle’s post, the Court granted review in a total of three cases today.
Update: Today’s Order List of the U.S. Supreme Court also reflects that the Court called for the views of the Solicitor General in one case.
“2nd Circuit Offers Glimpse of Federal Courts’ Recusal Process”: You can access today’s installment of my “On Appeal” column for law.com at this link.
“New team looks into Jovin death; Following takeover from Cold Case Unit, state detectives treat student murder as ‘brand new'”: This article appears today in The Yale Daily News.
Last Thursday’s issue of The Hartford Courant contained an article headlined “Super Sleuths In Jovin Probe; Decorated Ex-Cops Tackle 1998 Killing Of Yale Student.” On Saturday, the newspaper published an article headlined “Jovin Family Plea: Homicide Victim’s Sister Asks Public To Help New Investigative Team Solve Case.” Yesterday’s newspaper contained an editorial entitled “Who Killed Suzanne Jovin?” And Donald S. Connery had an op-ed yesterday entitled “Has Case Gotten Colder? A Decade After The Murder Of Suzanne Jovin In New Haven, The Case Is Back In The Hands Of The Department That First Fumbled It.”
“Jury under justices’ scrutiny; The Supreme Court will hear a Louisiana case in which a black man was sentenced to die after all blacks were kept off the panel”: Henry Weinstein has this article today in The Los Angeles Times.
“Justice on the Mend: The new attorney general’s first steps are encouraging.” This editorial appears today in The Washington Post.
“‘I will never leave Guantanamo'”: Sabin Willett has this op-ed today in The Boston Globe.
“Guantanamo Case May Mean Greater Wartime Role for U.S. Courts”: Greg Stohr and Jeff St.Onge of Bloomberg News provide this report.
“In Pa., Scouts Refuse to Lift Ban; Chapter to Ignore City’s Order to Alter Policy Excluding Gays”: The Washington Post contains this article today.
“Facebook Founder Finds He Wants Some Privacy”: This article appears today in The New York Times. According to the article, “Facebook tried last week to force the magazine 02138 to remove some unflattering documents about Mr. Zuckerberg from its Web site. But a federal judge turned down the company’s request for a court order to take down the material, according to the magazine’s lawyers.”
Today’s article goes on to report that “The [magazine] article relied in part on documents submitted in the lawsuit, in Federal District Court in Boston, that were ordered sealed by the judge in the case, Douglas P. Woodlock. On its Web site, 02138 posted not only the article, but also the documents, which include Mr. Zuckerberg’s handwritten application for admission to Harvard and an excerpt from an online journal he kept as a student that contains biting comments about himself and others…. [The freelance reporter who wrote the article] said he had obtained the papers in mid-September from the First Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston, which considered a part of the case, where a clerk apparently made a mistake and let him read and copy sealed documents, along with those that were still supposed to be open to the public.”
And in other coverage, The Harvard Crimson reports today that “Facebook Founder Loses Court Battle.”
You can view the magazine’s web site here, and the court documents in question can be accessed via this link.
“Ex-border agents’ case back in court; Appeals panel to consider hotly debated shooting of suspected drug smuggler”: The Houston Chronicle today contains an article that begins, “A panel of federal appeals court judges will hear arguments today in the controversial case of two former U.S. Border Patrol agents sentenced to more than a decade in prison for shooting a suspected drug smuggler and then trying to cover it up.”
The El Paso Times reports today that “Agents’ shooting appeal is today.”
And The Washington Times reports that “Border agents appeal verdict.”
“Supreme Court forum discusses changes in the Court’s decision-making”: Harvard Law School has issued this news release.
“Oliver Hill Team Wins Ames; Justice Scalia Presides”: This article appears in the current issue of The Harvard Law Record.
And Harvard Law School has issued a news release entitled “HLS holds ‘Ames Finals’ moot court competition with Justice Scalia presiding.”
Joining Justice Antonin Scalia in presiding over the moot court competition were Tenth Circuit Judge Carlos F. Lucero and Second Circuit Judge Debra Ann Livingston. You can view video of the event by clicking here (RealPlayer required).
“Federal Judge Lands at Center Of a New York Legal Mystery”: Today in The New York Sun, Joseph Goldstein has an article that begins, “The docket of Judge Jack Weinstein in Brooklyn has long been a magnet for big lawsuits with billions of dollars at stake. In case after case involving guns, cigarettes, Agent Orange, breast implants, typing keyboards, asbestos, and pharmaceuticals, manufacturers have defended their products before the now 86-year-old federal judge.”
The article goes on to report that “The latest interest in Judge Weinstein doesn’t stem from any of his Page 1-worthy rulings but the more arcane question of how some of his cases got assigned to the judge in the first place.”
“The Supreme Court Faces the Kangaroo Courts”: Joanne Mariner has this essay online today at FindLaw.
